Re: [xsl] RE: bad programming for speedup?

[Robert Koberg <rob@xxxxxxxxxx>]

ufff...

On Tue, 2007-07-24 at 16:43 +0200, christoph.naber@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I'm sorry that my imprecise description of the problem caused some 
> confusion.
> 
> I'm using XSLTPROC for transformation, which AFAIK only supports XSLT 1.0. 
> I had written a mail with input/output examples but I did not send it when 
> I received the recursion-hint from Michael, sorry for that.
> 
> > Have you tried the other suggestions? Mainly Andrew's method (or mine 
> > even, if the below does what I think it does).

You should have and you still should. Present a simplified version of
your source XML (your result seems to be clear that you want row
elements wrapped in a table element, but it depends on the source).
Since it is clear that you are beginning with XSL, you are doing
yourself a bad by not providing the relevant info.


> 
> I just edited the stylesheet according to Justins suggestions. 

You started this thread asking about speed (it is still in the subject
line). Justin also mentioned you should use a SAX filter. If dealing
with XML and the fastest way possible, you really can't beat it. It
would be relatively easy to to create a SAX filter that wraps rows in
tables.

It seems in later messages, that is not the case. 

> And I read 
> through Andrew's method. This way to code XSLT is very new for me. I 
> learned XSLT at the university, but as you (and me too) may have already 
> noticed, the professor only taught us the very basics.

Log a complaint! You paid for it -- you did not get it! (or perhaps you
did, but...)

> 
> > Please allow me to make some suggestions on your code below:
> 
> The more, the better.
<snip/>
> 
> Thank you all for your answers, I'm very astonished about so much response 
> to a dumb question.

it is not just for you! people on this list respond in many cases to
help others (not just the Original Poster), and to try to help them ask
better questions. (OK, no dumb questions... but there are ways to ask a
question in an dumb (as in the colloquial lazy/stupid - not ...) way).